Step 1: People express legitimate criticism of game.
Step 2: Devs and Gaming Press identify a few random people on Twitter or forums who have sent the devs threats.
Step 3: Devs/Media lump the entire group of people making the legitimate criticism with the few random people making threats and treat them as if they are a single group.
Step 4: Devs avoid addressing the real criticism by denouncing the threats and saying generic statements about how legitimate criticis...
Except for you repeating the lie about charging for patches, I agree with your comment. Kind of crazy that PS5 is selling better now than PS4 did at times when PS4 had a confirmed roster of incoming, single player focused exclusives, while the future for PS5 games is hazy at best. We heard so much about the switch to live service and the big investment in Bungie in order to gain their expertise in making those, but now Bungie can't even seem to manage their own live service game, and it&#...
Gosh I miss the early days of gaming podcasts in the mid/late 2000s. I was in high school and had not yet ever been in a position to afford all games or consoles that I wanted, and the game journalists and critics at that time had such a deep knowledge of games from basically the NES on.
Now when I read or hear a gaming journalist/influencer/YouTuber it's usually patently obvious that they have pretty limited knowledge of games as a whole. Frequently, they seem to have ...
And the idiot gamers who say they hate them but instantly attack any multiplayer game that isn't run as a live service by saying the devs "sent it out to die" or "abandoned" it.
Not to mention that the most common complaint these days with multiplayer games is that there aren't frequent enough content updates. Gamers can no longer just play a multiplayer game because it has good gameplay and the game is balanced well, etc. Gamers will actually play games with inferior gameplay as long as there are more things to "earn," a more heinous progression system, a "roadmap" of content, and frequent superficial changes to the maps to keep them "in...
@jznrpg
My favorite part of your comment is where you kept referring to Indiana Jones as "Indians Jones."
Lol unfortunately some people won't accept facts until someone with the right credibility says them. It's like being unwilling to accept that 2+2=4 unless someone with an advanced degree in math confirms it.
I'm fine with the first person. If it were all in third person you know everyone would just compare it to Uncharted (which would be a full circle moment since so many people compared Uncharted to Indiana Jones).
Lol now they don't even have to do that because kids now don't play games, they just play one F2P game (usually Fortnite). So you just get them gift cards for microtransactions for their birthday or whenever they get a good report card or whatever parents do now and they're good.
I bought it on Steam so I won't dispute you. I'm talking about the impact on Gamepass. I thought we'd get an announcement in the wake of Starfield about some crazy jump in subscriber numbers.
I really thought Starfield would have a bigger impact than what it apparently did.
Yes. But others have stated the obvious long before. It's like when gamepass started to ramp up and people on here (and elsewhere) pointed out the obvious fact that it would hua la carte game sales, and tons of people refused to believe it because MS claimed that Gamepass users actually spent more on games. Then when a dev/publisher/industry insider confirms the obvious truth that GP hurts sales, people treat it like new information, rather than a confirmation of the obvious. Or like when...
Lol I do like that whenever a dev of a popular game says something about subscriptions (gamepass) that some of us have been saying on here for years, it gets treated as groundbreaking wisdom/insight. Don't get me wrong, it's great to have devs with credibility back you up, but some of these obvious issues shouldn't need that kind of support for people to accept them.
My guess is that this trend is fueled by two things: 1) PlayStation has established itself, especially in the last 10ish years, as a haven for single player games, including many that can only be played on PlayStation (unless you want to wait 2-3 years for a possible PC port); and 2) PC gaming has become so much more accessible now that many PlayStation owners now also have a decent PC, and are likely to do much of whatever multiplayer gaming they do at all on the PC instead of PlayStation. ...
"They also bitched and complained about games not having "road maps" for online games. That means a game that will consistently be updated with new items, new maps, new levels, with some of it being free. And some of it being priced to purchase."
It's nice to see someone understanding that gamers have inflicted the curse of live service games on themselves. We get so mad when a dev says their multiplayer game is going to be a "service" or a...
You are definitely right on the last piece. The problem people overlook when talking about PS1/PS2 games (same thing would apply for N64) is that early 3D games stand the test of time worse that basically any other era of games. Putting everything else aside, it took until the early PS3/360 before you could reliably assume that 3D games were going to have reasonable controls (though some PS2/Xbox/GC games did). So unless you are prepared for that and have pretty specific nostalgia, going back...
I mean, that might explain the Team Fortress 2 thing, because Valve might bring that to Source 2 (though I'm not sure I'd bet on that), but I can't see how Portal 64 hurts them. If anything, it's more attention to the Portal and therefore Valve/Steam.
@TheColbertinator
I mean I think if everyone was honest with themselves, that would be true. That's kind of my point. Anytime a game gets announced that even smells like a live service, we all start dogpiling on it and saying that GaaS is ruining the industry. But as soon as a game is launched and left to stand on the merit of its gameplay without heinous progression systems, micro transactions, and slight alterations to maps, we start crying about how there aren't ...
Yep. They have been extremely lazy with the PS1 games, and even more so with PS2. I haven't followed as closely recently but for a long time they didn't add any PS2 games that weren't either available as part of those 50ish PS2 games that they previously put on PSN for PS4. As you note, they also play the game where they will put some collection of old games that released in a remastered/remade form on PS4 and use that as a "classic" game for the month.
Sigh. Should I assume you are as confused as you are pretending to be and explain? I guess so, even though I'm pretty sure you understand perfectly. I never really understand why people think they seem funnier or that they "own" people by pretending to lack rational capacity.
No, death threats aren't fine. If you take them seriously, report them to whatever platform they were posted on/sent from, and report them to the relevant legal authorities. Just don&...